dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
20
share rss forum feed


ocjosh

@clearwire-wmx.net
reply to chgo_man99

Re: what other nations offer 1gb to house right now for cheap?

Totally agree.
If 1Gb/1Gb connections are available at the Hong Kong price or even much higher @ Google price, $70, sign me up.
Verizon/TWX have no sense, no rights to decide what speed should be good for consumers. Even Verizon's Mbps price is so expensive, there are demands but not at that super high price tag.
Too many people are saying we don't need that speed, that's you. "We don't need that speed" doesn't means I can't sign it up and leave it there at affordable price.
It's like saying I don't need to travel to overseas or space then urge everyone not to try it.
We need 1Gb connections at affordable price, Verizon.


chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

said by ocjosh :

It's like saying I don't need to travel to overseas or space then urge everyone not to try it.
We need 1Gb connections at affordable price, Verizon.

Thats not even logical comparision. Who compares broadband speeds to travel? That sounds like addiction to Internet.

You go to travel overseas to see different landscape, culture, have a lifetime experience you'll remember till the rest of the live.

20 mb, 100mb, 1gb for your personal connection, whats the difference, do you have a business? For now for an average consumer there are not yet any applications that take advantage of even 100mb connection. The advantage is you just get faster download and upload of large files. It enables to share connection with large household. But thats it. You are complaining about driving on 2 lane highway instead of 6 lane even though you're driving through a rural area.

I am not saying we shouldn't head in direction of getting 1gb connection for everyone. But not everyone needs 1gb at low price for NOW.

In addition Google can afford to afford 1GB at $70, partially because they get heavy subsidy from selling your data, making bucks on internet ads and limiting deployment to only one city (theoretically two split between states).


ocjosh

@clearwire-wmx.net

It's very logical.
If you already said that there is no application or anything a consumer not even need 100mb speed, you are making decision for consumer. You are limiting consumer from any other potential beyond 100mb or 1Gb speed. It's like saying please no 5G wireless development, there is no app for that speed yet.
Telling others that you don't need this, you don't need that.
That logic is what Verizon want us to know: pay more for older technology and slower speed because you don't need higher speed and pay me more anyway.



ocjosh

@clearwire-wmx.net
reply to chgo_man99

said by chgo_man99:

said by ocjosh :

In addition Google can afford to afford 1GB at $70, partially because they get heavy subsidy from selling your data, making bucks on internet ads and limiting deployment to only one city (theoretically two split between states).

So, if I have Google fiber but never access to Google's sites but only go on Netflix, some not google related service, they will sell my data.
And, I have Verizon and use Google sites, or site with Google related Ads, Verizon will prevent Google from collection data.
I see... It's logical.

chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

[1] travel vs broadband
very illogical, even a 5th grader knows that.

[2] cost subsidy
No they simply make money from all people that go to their search engine or their other websites to subsidize their cost. Whether all people who sign up for google fiber, access their websites doesn't matter.

[3] need for high speed
Telcos are not limiting consumers from any other potential beyond 100mb or 1GB. Enterprise users who are willing to pay business rates can get any fiber Ethernet connection 100mb and above. There is just simply no high demand yet for 1GB connection at low residential prices for under $50. DSLReports users are minority of broadband customers.

Btw, do people in South Korea or Hong Kong who have fast 1GB connections, stream 30GB blue ray movies at full rate? If they have infrastructure in place already, why there are no applications to fully utilize it? And lets not forget, they did not have to replace old copper wired infrastructure and other factors that influence cost of doing business. No business itself for profit will be willing to operate at higher loss if it does not have to. Its simply not logical. Period.



badtrip
I heart the East Bay
Premium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA
reply to ocjosh

Don't waste your breath ocjosh. People have been posting, "No one needs/no one will ever need *Mbps connection!" posts since this website first came online. Take a look at some of the archived posts and you will see some airheads saying we will never need the speeds that are SLOW today. Same shit, different day.

Expand your moderator at work

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to badtrip

Re: what other nations offer 1gb to house right now for cheap?

The question is, what's the application for it once we can stream 4k video? There's only so many hours in the day to consume video that's higher resolution than what our eyes can even see.



ocjosh

@clearwire-wmx.net
reply to chgo_man99

said by chgo_man99:

[1] travel vs broadband
very illogical, even a 5th grader knows that.

[2] cost subsidy
No they simply make money from all people that go to their search engine or their other websites to subsidize their cost. Whether all people who sign up for google fiber, access their websites doesn't matter.

[3] need for high speed
Telcos are not limiting consumers from any other potential beyond 100mb or 1GB. Enterprise users who are willing to pay business rates can get any fiber Ethernet connection 100mb and above. There is just simply no high demand yet for 1GB connection at low residential prices for under $50. DSLReports users are minority of broadband customers.

Btw, do people in South Korea or Hong Kong who have fast 1GB connections, stream 30GB blue ray movies at full rate? If they have infrastructure in place already, why there are no applications to fully utilize it? And lets not forget, they did not have to replace old copper wired infrastructure and other factors that influence cost of doing business. No business itself for profit will be willing to operate at higher loss if it does not have to. Its simply not logical. Period.

To make the point here, you represent the general public (?) agree with, there is no need for cheaper & higher speed internet.

If it's 300 Mb or better speed and under $35 to make it affordable, available, most of users will sign up now. Whether we need the speed or not, the cost is the key.

Instead, this telco told public: you don't need it. It's like telling people don't explore outside the box for higher speed. Higher speed applications won't be necessary. It's egg or chicken first. (I.e. Don't explore outside where we are now, no need to travel even space, no other countries.) Bad example, but straight forward.

Cost subsidy case, it's up to users to use Google sites or not, not the ISP effect. You are saying Google fiber can only use Google sites. I can sign up but access other than Google sites, right? how does this subsidy case make sense?

Subsidy from Google? How about other ISPs in the world who sell lower than Google fiber with 100 mb 1Gb, they got cost subsidies from Google fiber too??

Sonic net planed to sell 1Gb for less, they got subsidy from Google. Is that what you mean?

Again, what I want to say is cost issue. Verizon Fiber is too expensive, not because we don't want to sign up. Even Verizon Fiber 15Mb/5Mb is selling @ $69.99/month for first 2 yrs. Verizon doesn't offer 1Gb yet, Verizon's 15/5 is selling at Goggle Fiber's 1G price.

My HOA fiber for our 600 homes community is 20/10 @ $30 a month. Most of us voted to sign up for that. Why? Price and speed point.

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

What point are you trying to get at? It's hard to judge how price sensitive people are. I think middle class and upper middle class people have no issue paying $50+/mo for a faster connection, while we have serious problems with the affordability of broadband in lower-income neighborhoods, and accessibility at all in rural areas.

Personally, I would pay up to about $70/mo for as fast as I could get for that price point, but I know people who won't even get cable, and stay on god-awful super-slow DSL because it's cheaper, and many of them are perfectly well able to afford cable.


chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
San Jose, CA

I guess he is one of those people on earth who think they are entitled to get everything in life for free or cheap. I guess in this example, people don't understand fiber is expensive to deploy. I wonder if those people ever visit their doctor or lawyer. Or even pay for rent, car payments, student loans, because thats where big expenses from your salary go. And here some argue $70 a month for 1GB broadband is too much lol.